Accountant James Dinsdale, who died in October 2020, left behind a sizable £1.8 million estate and a deeply complex legal situation. He had married Dr Victoria Fowell in 2012, but never divorced her. Then in 2017, believing (or perhaps not realising) he was free to remarry, he married beautician Margaret Dinsdale in Las Vegas—marriage number two—which, under the law, is void because of the existing legal marriage.
Because James died intestate (without a will), intestacy rules initially meant his estate passed to Victoria and his adult son. Margaret, however, brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (“the 1975 Act”), arguing she should be treated as a spouse for the purposes of reasonable financial provision, given her good-faith belief and her role as his primary carer during his illness.
The High Court has already ruled the second marriage was void—but not disputed that Margaret can be regarded as a “spouse” under a 1975 Act claim, and she was granted an interim £50,000 to help with legal and living costs. A final hearing will determine how the estate is to be split between Dr Fowell, Margaret, and William Dinsdale.
Legal issues and their implications
- Bigamy and the void marriage: Under UK law, marrying someone while still in a valid marriage is legally void. This means Margaret’s marriage to James had no legal effect, and she had no automatic rights under intestacy or spousal inheritance rules.
- Intestacy rules: Because James died without a will, his estate is distributed according to intestacy: first to his legal spouse (Dr Fowell) and his children. Margaret, as the void second wife, has no automatic entitlement despite her prolonged relationship.
- Claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975: The 1975 Act allows certain individuals, including those treated as spouses or dependents, to apply for “reasonable financial provision” from an estate, if they are not adequately provided for in the will (or if there’s no will). In Margaret’s case, her good-faith belief in the validity of her marriage, her financial dependency, and her role as carer support her claim. The court has already recognised her as a “spouse” for the purposes of this Act.
- Good-faith marriage (putative spouse concept): This mirrors the concept of a “putative spouse” in other jurisdictions—someone who believes in good faith that their marriage is valid, and who may receive rights similar to a legal spouse. Margaret’s belief, despite the marriage being void, and evidence of her dependency and contribution, have led the court to treat her as a “spouse” in this context.
- Court discretion and reasonableness: The 1975 Act gives courts wide discretion over what makes up “reasonable provision.” In making its decision, the court considers factors such as:
-
Financial resources and needs of the claimant and other beneficiaries
-
Obligations of the deceased to the claimant
-
Size and nature of the estate
-
Duration and quality of the relationship
-
Any contributions by the claimant – emotional, practical, or financial
-
Any other relevant circumstances
Margaret’s role as carer, her financial dependence, and her belief in a valid marriage are weighed against Victoria and William’s positions.
What went wrong and how to avoid it
This case highlights several pitfalls for both individuals and advisers:
Failing to finalise divorce before remarriage without a formal Decree Absolute (divorce final order), an individual remains legally married, making any new marriage void. Never remarry unless you’re certain your divorce is fully complete.
Dying intestate bypasses your own wishes and allows others to inherit by law, even if that isn’t what you intended. A proper, professionally drafted will gives you control over who inherits what and allows you to mitigate claims under intestacy rules and the 1975 Act.
Even if a second marriage is void, a partner marrying in good faith can still bring a claim under the 1975 Act if they were financially dependent or contributed significantly.
To prevent post-death claims, divorcing couples should seek and include a “clean break” financial order and a specific no-claim clause in the divorce settlement. Without those, a former spouse may still make a claim under the 1975 Act if they remain unmarried.
Case law emphasises the importance of communications (e.g., letters of wishes), and clear evidence of intentions. Open communication with dependants and beneficiaries can reduce disputes.
Tips to avoid scenarios like this include:
-
Finalise divorce properly: Secure your Decree Absolute or Final Order, and ensure property/financial matters are settled with clean break provisions.
-
Include a “no-claim” clause: Explicitly exclude claims under the 1975 Act in your divorce settlement.
-
Draft a clear will: Regularly update it to reflect current circumstances. Use professional advice for maximum legal security.
-
Use a letter of wishes: Although not binding, such letters can clarify your intentions to executors and courts.
-
Don’t assume common-law marriage rights: In England and Wales there is no such thing as a common law husband or wife. Informal or cohabitating relationships don’t guarantee legal protection; so you should make arrangements accordingly.
-
Consider your married, separated, or divorced status when you plan your estate: All these circumstances affect legal rights and potential claims in different ways. You should speak with a solicitor to ensure your wishes are met when you die.
Navigating emotion and law in estate planning
The Dinsdale case is a sharp cautionary tale. It brings into stark relief how emotional, informal, or unplanned relationships can intersect with rigid legal frameworks to produce outcomes that surprise and devastate families. Margaret believed herself married legitimately, provided care, and was entirely dependent, yet by law, her marriage was void and she had no entitlement without invoking the 1975 Act.
Individuals should make sure that their marital status is legally clear, they have a valid will, and anticipate potential claims, especially from former partners, and meet these with appropriate legal safeguards.
By taking these steps, many of the pain, dispute, and legal complexity seen in the Dinsdale case could have been avoided, or at least managed proactively.
Find The Best Divorce & Family Lawyers Near You
We independently review and list the top divorce lawyers and family solicitors in the towns and cities near you. 100% free.
The information on this website is to be considered a guide and is therefore not legal advice. You use this information with the understanding that Wiselaw does not accept liability for any direct or indirect losses as a result of anyone relying on or acting upon the information on this website. Whilst we endeavour to provide accurate information, Wiselaw does not accept liability for any errors or omissions on this website.
